thanks for the discussion - I really appreciate your comments and points of view. It is interesting, that they differ much from the general consensus in .de, but no matter, I will state some arguments for that patch.

First of all, I'd like to say, that Kosmor 2 is enginieered definitely in a way, where NO instantaneous travel at all is possible - everything moves at their user-set or maximum speeds and there simply won't be a "teleportation" feature. The "features" of unlimited speed and "parallel happenings" lead to many problems in K1, and are ultimately the reason for a complete re-write of the game engine.

The arguments of this patch are manifold, from most important to least important for me:
1) It is a balancing approach towards K2.
2) We are convinced, that you "good guys" who don't "exploit" the teleportation feature can work out a strategy. In fact, there are several approaches, one is to secure a local friendly planet in a remote conflict.
3) We like to see "smaller" WPs in a way, that not everyone puts all their CP on the master WP.
4) We would like to see more regional conflicts.

I would be very sorry about anyone dropping out of the game because of this, I would suggest you first give it a try and see. If this patch really turns out to be bad, there is always a way of going back.

So like I said ... important is that .de agrees this ... nevermind what those from .com think
I know that .com is smaller but it's still sad

2'. We already wrote some flaws of this "great way" of securing a friendly planet in the area of action.
3'. Smaller WPs that cannot ally on the battlefield means "free for all".
Please tell us what you really want !!! What's the endpoint of this ? Where we are heading ( without knowing ) ?

And btw ... who are "we" ??? I know you Maelstroem ... but who are the rest of "we" ?

Best regards!
Assisi_________________Councilor of the House Assisi in the house Nemesis

Where we are headed:
There are no further changes on schedule for Kosmor 1. As I mentioned before, the possibility of infinite movement speed is a severe flaw in the game design, makes the game unpredictable and can cause great suffering. If in .com, this possibility has not been exploited or used overly, this is a good for the players - if we do not apply a patch against it, in .com, I am sure the days are counted until it happens excessively.

Also, there has been an intense discussion about other ways to solve the problem, but there was no satisfactory result. For example, it has been discussed, that retreating ships should go back to any or all friendly planets (Nikoys points two and three). This is not good, because sometimes players with large fleets only have very few planets (they obtained money from stockmarket, or by other means). Another thing: Keeping ships intact (only delaying the process) imposes more problems, for example. it must be visible even for enemy imperators, when and where these "delayed" ships are about to arrive (otherwise the relocation "surprise" would work as before, just with a delay). Another problem with delays or part-back-shipments is, what happens, when the target planet is not under control of the player anymore, etc.

About the "we":
that would be myself and "The High Council", the second man behind the scenes and co-creator of Kosmor (since the first version was made in 2002/2003).

Another thing: with Kosmor 2, there will be changes, and we want to embrace them, because, face it, Kosmor 1 is not fit for the future. So, every step towards the next version (in game mechanics, or functionality), is good, from my point of view (Note: Kosmor 2 will not restart the universe).

As I mentioned before, the possibility of infinite movement speed is a severe flaw in the game design, makes the game unpredictable and can cause great suffering.

More "suffering" will bring this. Because this new implementation "save" us from something that didn't hurt us but will bring so many problems. The game strategy will become even more weird. For me ... is mportant that the game to be close to realistic.

Maelstroem wrote:

If in .com, this possibility has not been exploited or used overly, this is a good for the players - if we do not apply a patch against it, in .com, I am sure the days are counted until it happens excessively.

pure speculation

Maelstroem wrote:

Another thing: with Kosmor 2, there will be changes, and we want to embrace them, because, face it, Kosmor 1 is not fit for the future. So, every step towards the next version (in game mechanics, or functionality), is good, from my point of view (Note: Kosmor 2 will not restart the universe).

We can only embrace things that will make things more interesting ( even if harder ). In my opinion ( trust me that I want to be wrong ) this will make things only harder and annoying. I will come with some scenaries to be discussed here.

Once again I must ask ... do you want us to embrace a more like "free for all" game ???

Regards !_________________Councilor of the House Assisi in the house Nemesis

We have both layed out our points of view, which happened in a very civilised manner, which is what I enjoy so much here in kosmor.com. There are notable differences, and that is okay, there will always be differences...

Regarding realism, I would not think, that instant ship relocation over unlimited distances is very logical, but alas, the whole sci-fi genre is a bit unrealistic when looking with Einstein's eyes...

By using the term "free-for-all-game", I understand you fear, that "everyone will work on his own", "no more team-playing". This must be proven - there might be less concentrated CP on single huge WPs, but really, do you think this is bad for the game itself (trying to ignore the current game situation you may be in - which I do not know)?

I would like to buy you a beer and discuss things over, but I think the distance is too big to meet each other in a bar, we would need an instant teleportation feature in RL .

Aurion : I was indeed stubborn but our discussion was not off topic and I think that maybe the rest of us want to see it.

Maelstroem : I definetly wanted to be respectuous even if I sometimes become annoying by not letting go so easy. But I think everyone have to fight for his ideas.
I realize that you want only the best for this game even if "the best" may differ from person to person.
You must know that I am not a defender of the fast ship relocation ... only that I don't like some of the consequences of the way this will be removed.

But ... there are things that can be done so things will indeed evolve. One would be the posibility of allying in a battle with someone else who's not in the same house. This way more of us will have hyperjump and many other benefits.
The reason because I think another upgrade (like that one above) will be good is because people will still seek a good cooperation with others. I and the others from my house worked a lot to our cooperation and unity that would be so bad this to slowly vanish forced by the new implementation.

Respect !_________________Councilor of the House Assisi in the house Nemesis

Personally, I'm mainly waiting for V2. A better solution to the issue would be good, but not if it delays V2. Will the 75% rule cause problems? Yes, but the game has gotten very stagnant, so I'd view almost any change as good._________________Commander Gozer in the house Gozerian

Im slightly confused... if i give the example that my fleet is engaged elsewhere in the universe and for some reason my wp or hp is attacked by another house... how would i be expected to have a close by planet for my fleet to move to without loss? Also any intergration often lead to me losing 25% of my planets... so even if i had a close by set of planets which i conquered on route to a fight... would i not likey lose them in the intergration?

If a sub has your ships then declares independant then a massive amount of cp could be wiped out... some would say tough luck... i would say why move the goal posts of a game we have all got used to playing and accepted.

Im not a great fan of this patch as i feel its a heavy handed approach to a problem i feel very few people in .com have ever even thought about. I should point out however that i did once experience an instant jump myself, however this wasn't something done intentionally... the negative consequences to this patch may well outweigh the useful benefits

As long as the planet stays within the same house, either because it's your or because it gets transfered because of the 25% rule, your ships will stay.

Oh, and if your fleet is not near your warplanet, you better make sure you won't get conquered anyways.

If you have your ships on another players warplanet, both of you have to make sure that you got a planet nearby.

@Assisi: You missunderstood me. You can discuss this here as long as you want as long as it stays civilized (though Maelstroem might stop answering). I was talking about that Maelstroem would like to discuss this things over a beer, but that the distance would be too big. So i suggested using IRC (or even use voice talk, like Skype etc.) as this would allow you to speak more like you would when speaking face to face, and certainly way faster, so you could exchange more opinions, facts etc.

A post in a forum is always different then direct communication, and it's something like this: Forum - Mail - Instant Messenger - IRC - VoIP - Face to Face.

Buzz makes a good point; what if a sub has a large proprotion of your fleet stationed on his WP and declares indep? that's a tremendous loss to someone and that is completely and utterly unfair. The sub could become more poweful than his super in a blink on an eye, simply through going independent (and creating distance between he and his super) which could lead to incidences of regicide across the universe! This would only serve to rip apart the super/sub relationship as we currently understand it.

Secondly, what if a subordinate has his fleet on his super's WP and wants to declare independence; which he has the right to do; he will either have to ask his super to politely 'deliver' his ships back or lose up to 75% - again this is completely unfair and will even serve to trap some people in certain situations, certainly not instil more independency throughout the game.

Thirdly, let us not underestimate what a tremendous loss 75% is. That would equate for me at atleast to around 6-9 months worth of fleet building, all gone in a flash. This is a slow game in many respects and if I were to lose 75% of my fleet in a flash because of simple mechanics I would consider leaving also.

I agree instantaneous travel should be stopped, it is not realistic and can, in very rare instances be used to someone's advantage. Let us bear in mind that many other factors would have to align themselves too in order for the current situation to be used to someone's advantage.

I think we are over thinking this in many ways, should we not allow democracy to play it's part? The game after all is only what it is because of its players. This would resolve this issue in seconds. If players are happy to continue to play under the current way of things, and, in doing so, are happy and mature enough to accept that this can be used to someone's advantage once every so while then we should keep it as it is. If however the majority wish this to be changed, and accept that they may, in some situations, lose 75% of their fleet then it should be changed.

What should not happen is something potentially a massively strategy changing as this be thrust upon players without a vote. I think you know what my vote will be.

The new rule in gameplay reality will mean only one thing: A single imperator with not very large fleet and good knowledge about the HPs of a given house can easily destroy this house, no matter how big and how powerful it is! We must not be afraid to face it - this change is designed to combat something that we DO NOT actually suffer from, BUT has the potential (and very probably will) bring big difference in the game, unfortunately not towards good... in fact it may wreck real havoc in our simulated universe!

Securing enemy planets along the way can NOT solve the problem, as a big house has very many subs to take care of, so getting a planet for everyone is simply not possible!

Unfortunately for us in this very moment we (the big houses in the game) have to deal with a cluster of possibly multi-player pirates (single players attacking everyone at random), which posses striking knowledge EXACTLY about the location of different HPs and had already caused the destruction of the second biggest house in the Galaxy by EXACTLY the same method - HP integration of the biggest subs! So right now this situation is very important and very actual for us! We must pay attention what changes are done, because the new implementation can have the OPPOSITE effect - it is designed to fight the small players which usually use it intentionally - as you said:

Maelstroem wrote:

This is not good, because sometimes players with large fleets only have very few planets (they obtained money from stockmarket, or by other means)

This quote describes very well how actually one of this pirates looks like and I can tell you that usually they are using this ship relocation on purpose here in .com .

So, not to get lost in all that, I have several particular proposals:
1. Maeli, please take some time to create a list with all the "plusses" against all "minuses" of the new rule. If you don't have the time I will compile this list for you. Then we can easily see what is predominant.
Up to now it looks that unfortunately the minuses are FAR more than the plusses (which are actually really minor). This leads to the second proposal:

2. People know very well what is better for them. Please let them tell you! Create a poll where everyone can vote what he prefers. Thus we can't be mistaken.

3. Can you please tell us when approximately Kosmor 2 will be ready? Will it take very long time? Because if the time is not so long, then why not letting the rule as it is waiting for K2 to come? And finally - how you are going to solve the same question in K2?

I will not talk about benefits and flaws because i realize that almost everything that could be said was said at least twice and i can see Maelstroem become pissed, but from what i read here the next thing results: specially the people from my house - The Order of Templar - do not like at all this new way.This is because we work so hard to make a very good cooperation, to coordinates ourselfs so this great "organism" to function properly and make all of us function under the same will. And I know how much Assisi and the rest of the guys worked at this and that's why they has problems with this.
I am a small player and at least for now i am only a small suport in my house but i realize that without dubious changes great things waits for the Templars.
From what Maelstroem said the decision was taken(?!?) but he didn't said that he don't won't big houses in the game only maybe smaller WPs. So let us think about what can be improved in order to allow us(and those who want to play in a close manner) to continue under the same path.

Best Regards
Thaumaturg_________________Major Thaumaturg in the house Nemesis

I don't want to be stubborn - if the majority of players here in .com (for whatever reasons) thinks this patch is a bad thing for this game - i am willing to discuss NOT to patch kosmor.com.

Would anyone (preferably Aurion - thanks, man ) start a neutral poll/survey in the forum (neutral in a way, that it is not directed towards a certain poll goal)?

For some questions asked:
* Kosmor 2 is still some time away, it is a very large project indeed and needs serious testing before going live. I would say going live can not happen within a year, that is why i wanted to patch both versions.

* Kosmor 2 will solve this problem differently - relocated fleets will begin to move towards their relocation target - as they can remain in open space and are seen on the map, this is my absolutely preferred way of doing things. They will fly at their native fleet speed, say 120LY/turn and will use up fleet fuel, but the player can control the "fleeing" fleet at once after the separation and can redirect it to any other target. It is absolutely impossible to "patch" this behaviour in K1, so don't ask .